This small, simple print deserves an explanation, as it had massive implications for me. This print was conceived and executed at a time when I was beginning to approach language theory in philosophy, and I was constantly stewing, trying to understand exactly how meaning in language worked. I was also reading and ruminating about how an art object is to be distinguished from a so-called "real object." This mental toying prompted my questioning to what extent an artist has control over his/her work, and how are we to sort the deliberate from the arbitrary. We all know critics have written volumes into works of art, illuminating their murky depths for us, only to find out there was nothing there to begin with, or they were completely wide of the mark. Duchamp gave us readymades. Warhol used repetition until meaning was all but void. So, how does the true causal history of an artwork relate to its intention or alleged meaning? I had, and still have, no idea; but I set out to make work that was based heavily on documentation of an event, rather than trying to convey meanings. In this print, I assigned a grey tone to each number on a dice, set up a template, and drafted an artwork by chance. This process (which I would later find out was similar to John Cage's while composing music with the I-Ching) was heavily exploited in my later undergrad years in both prints and ceramics. This concept continues to linger in my artwork, and is an idea I wish to flesh out both aesthetically and philosophically in the future. 7x22", edition of 6.
